CopyCited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 225, 2012 WL 851033, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 552
...ause there was "no county of residence which [was] common to all three defendants"); Reliable Electrical Distribution,
382 So.2d at 1288 (concluding that where defendants reside in multiple counties, plaintiff is entitled to choose venue pursuant to section
47.021, Florida Statutes); and Doonan,
114 So.2d at 506 (concluding that Enfinger did not apply where the three defendants did not all share a common county of residence)....
...Actions against foreign corporations doing business in this state shall be brought in a county where such corporation has an agent or other representative, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located. Finally, section
47.021, Florida Statutes (2011), provides that "[a]ctions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." Although these provisions were previously numbered as sections 46.02 and 46.04, respectively, the substance of sections
47.021 and
47.051 has been part of Florida law since 1906....
...at 783,
112 S.Ct. 2251 (quoting Garcia,
469 U.S. at 546,
105 S.Ct. 1005). There is no basis in the statutory provisions for treating the venue rights of an individual defendant as superior to the plaintiff's statutory right to select venue. To the contrary, section
47.021which permits a plaintiff to bring an action "in any county in which any defendant resides," §
47.021, Fla. Stat. (2011) (emphasis added)does not distinguish between corporate and individual defendants or place any other limitation on the plaintiff's choice of venue based on residency. Under the reasoning of Enfinger, for purposes of section
47.021 a corporate defendant may be deemed to reside in only one county, although under the unequivocal terms of section
47.051 the same corporate defendant may have more than one county of residence....
...n to transfer venue should have been granted. Brady, 39 P. at 210. In contrast to the statute in Brady, Florida's venue provisions did not and do not provide a defendant with a right to be sued in his county of residence. Instead, section 46.02, now section 47.021, expressly provides that where codefendants reside in more than one county, the plaintiff has the right to select venue in any county in which any defendant to the action resides....
...cy. Receding from the joint residency rule of Enfinger will promote stability in the law. Once the joint residency rule of Enfinger is abrogated, venue in the situation of multiple defendants will be governed by the application of the plain terms of section 47.021, Florida Statutes, under which defendants will be amenable to suit "in any county in which any defendant resides." § 47.021, Fla....
...Based on the foregoing, we recede from Enfinger's restriction on a plaintiff's right to select a venue based on the defendants' residency. When reviewing a plaintiff's venue selection, the Florida courts should apply the plain language of sections
47.011,
47.021, and
47.051, Florida Statutes....
...LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. PARIENTE, J., recused. NOTES [1] Again, section 46.02, Florida Statutes (1955), which provided that an action against two or more defendants could be brought in any county in which any defendant resided, is substantively equivalent to today's section
47.021, and section 46.04, Florida Statutes (1955), which defined where a corporation doing business in Florida could be sued, is substantively equivalent to today's section
47.051....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida
...Count Seven of the amended complaint sets forth that one of the defendants or two of the defendants or all of the defendants were responsible for the injuries sustained by Mr. Prater as a result of one or both of the surgical procedures performed. Section 47.021, Florida Statutes 1967, F.S.A., permits an action against parties residing in different counties to be brought in any county in which any of the defendants reside. It provides: "47.021 Actions Against Defendants Residing in Different Counties or Districts....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida
...Their plea of privilege on venue was denied and they bring this interlocutory appeal. The cause of action arose in South Carolina, so situs is not relevant to the venue question here. The question is whether the defendants reside in "different" counties within the purview of § 47.021, F.S.A....
...Pursuant to this section, appellant Commercial Carrier Corporation "resides" in both Hillsborough and Polk Counties; its codefendant Clay Hyder Trucking Lines, however, "resides" only in Polk County. Thus each "resides" in Polk County, although Commercial Carrier Corporation also "resides" elsewhere. Now, § 47.021, F.S.A....
..."different" counties. [1] But when all defendants to an action enjoy mutual residence within one county, the section does not apply even though, as here, one or more corporate codefendants may also "reside" in other counties. We therefore hold that § 47.021, F.S.A....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Actions against foreign corporations doing business in this state shall be brought in a county where such corporation has an agent or other representative, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located." Fla. Stat. §
47.051 (1973). and "§
47.021. Actions against defendants residing in different counties. Actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." [2] Fla. Stat. §
47.021 (1973). While on the face of these two statutes, it may appear that plaintiffs had the choice, under §
47.021, of laying venue in either Orange or Broward County, being the "residence" of one or the other defendant, this is not in fact the case due to a fairly logical and well-reasoned line of cases interpreting §
47.021....
...One defendant "resided" in both Hillsborough and Polk Counties; the other "resided" only in Polk County. "Thus," the appellate court reasoned, "each `resides' in Polk County, although [one defendant] also `resides' elsewhere." The court then quoted § 47.021, supra, adding emphasis to the word, "different", and concluded: "It is clear, of course, that this section applies only when codefendants reside in `different' counties. But when all defendants to an action enjoy mutual residence within one county, the section does not apply even though, as here, one or more corporate codefendants may also `reside' in other counties. "We therefore hold that § 47.021, F.S.A....
...NOTES [1] The term "resided" is here used for convenience and stands for the satisfaction of the statutory requirements for laying venue in actions against a foreign corporation which are set out in Fla. Stat. §
47.051 (1973); these will be discussed infra. [2] Although §
47.021 speaks of defendants "residing," connoting individual defendants, this section has been determined to be equally applicable to corporations....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Thus, this statute is not helpful to our disposition of this appeal. Second, with reference to the venue statute, Chapter 47, Laws of Florida, 1969, we know that under Section
47.011 actions shall be brought where the defendant resides or where the cause of action accrues and that under Section
47.021 actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 1049738
...urpose of establishing venue pursuant to section
47.051. Under section
47.011, Florida Statutes (1997), an action must be brought in the county where a defendant resides, where the cause accrued, or where the property in litigation is located. Under section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1997), an action "against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county where the defendant resides." Thus, venue for an action against multiple defendants is proper in any county in which one of the defendants resides....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...pinion. [3] SCHEB, C.J., and BOARDMAN, J., concur. NOTES [1] Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(A) permits appeals from nonfinal orders which concern venue. [2] If any one defendant resided in Lee County, venue would properly lie there. § 47.021, Fla....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1992 WL 301314
...We find no statutory basis for venue in Columbia County. Section
47.011, Florida Statutes (1989), requires actions to be brought, "only in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located." (Emphasis added.) Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1989), provides, "Actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Construing the pleadings herein most strongly against the pleader, Coggin, as we must do in testing the sufficiency of its motion, it must be assumed that Laudig is a resident of Putnam County as to whom venue has been properly laid. [3] Such situation brings into play F.S. Section 47.021, F.S.A., which provides that actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties or districts may be brought in any county or district in which any defendant resides....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20380
...Shelley) and the treating hospital in its corporate entity (Inter-Medic). The cause of action accrued in St. Johns County, where the treating hospital is located and where Dr. Shelley resides; however, this action was brought in Duval County, where Inter-Medic maintains another hospital facility. Section 47.021, Florida Statutes, provides that, regarding multiple defendants residing in different counties, venue "may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." However, this provision is inapplicable where a corporate defendant re...
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2004 WL 1751193
...Bauman concedes that he is a resident of Orange County; therefore, venue is proper as to him. §
47.011, Fla. Stat. (2003). Although not a resident of Orange County, venue is also proper as to Prosperity Financial Services, Inc., because it is a co-defendant. §
47.021, Fla....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1993 WL 321729
...is located for venue purposes. L.B. McLeod Const. Co. v. State,
106 Fla. 805,
143 So. 594 (Fla. 1932). Although generally an action against multiple defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which a defendant resides, section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1992), where a corporate defendant resides in the same county as an individual defendant, venue is only proper in that county of joint residence....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...anted. I would follow the decision of the Court of Appeal, First District. NOTES [1] §
47.011, Fla. Stat., provides in pertinent part that actions shall be brought only in the county where the defendant resides or where the cause of action accrues. §
47.021, Fla....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2001 WL 109206
...The general venue statute, section
47.011, Florida Statutes (1999), provides: "Actions shall be brought only in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located." Addressing venue in matters involving more than one *995 defendant, section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1999), provides: "Actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." All of the defendants resided outside Pinellas County and HOSS does not argue that its action involved property located in Pinellas County....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...Under section
47.011, Florida Statutes (1997), actions may be brought in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located. In the case of multiple defendants residing in different counties, section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1997), provides that an action "may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." Section
47.051, Florida Statutes (1997), provides that actions against domestic corporations shall be brought only in the county where such corporation keeps an office for transaction of its business, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located. Section
47.021 permits an action to be brought in a county in which any defendant resides when the defendants reside in different counties....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 5437, 2009 WL 1393474
...The trial court granted the motion. The parties agree that Broward County is a proper venue because Farinella resides there. See §
47.011, Fla. Stat. (2008). The parties also agree that Juana could have filed her complaint in Dade County where Cruz is a resident, see section
47.021, Florida Statutes (2008), and where the causes of action accrued as St....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1989 WL 62397
...They only claim in their briefs that Pizza Hut has agents in Broward, Alachua and Bradford. Defendant Pizza Hut never alleges the location of its resident agent. The defendants rely on Inter-Medic Health Centers, Inc. v. Murphy,
400 So.2d 206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), which held: Section
47.021, Florida Statutes, provides that, regarding multiple defendants residing in different counties, venue "may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." However, this provision is inapplicable where a corporate defendant re...
...the statute governing venue. Bassett v. Talquin Electric Cooperative,
362 So.2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), cert. denied,
368 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1979). Where there are multiple defendants, venue lies in the county where any one of the defendants reside. §
47.021, Fla....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...Boruchow, a resident of Dade County, and one of the present appellants, Dr. Vance, a resident of Palm Beach County. Mrs. Minton's estate filed a wrongful death action against both physicians and Dr. Vance's professional association [1] in Dade County pursuant to Section 47.021, Florida Statutes (1981), which provides: Actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides....
...Dr. Boruchow for his $100,000 liability insurance limits and voluntarily dismissed him from the lawsuit. Immediately thereafter, Dr. Vance and his P.A., the only remaining defendants, moved to transfer the case to Palm Beach County, contending that Section
47.021 no longer applied and that they were entitled to that relief under Section
47.011, Florida Statutes (1981), [2] which did....
...[4] It is of preeminent significance that the statutory language itself, the proper interpretation of which is the key to the resolution of the instant problem, specifically refers to the venue privilege as attaching only when the action is "begun," as stated in the title of Sec.
47.011, or "brought," Secs.
47.011,
47.021, expressions universally regarded as equivalent to "commenced." 5 Words and Phrases, "Begun" (1968); 5A Words and Phrases, "Brought" (1968); Turkett v....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1996 WL 482649
...In their motion to recall mandate, the appellants argue that this court's original opinion in Case No. 95-2416, In re Receivership of Guarantee Security Life Insurance Company,
678 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), "expressly negates the premise for ... Seapine[`s]... choice of venue in Leon County," which was based on section
47.021, Florida Statutes, and that "[b]ecause the Department *510 is not, and never was, properly named as a defendant (as the Opinion holds), venue in the Action does not and never did lie in Leon County." Our review of the appellants' motio...
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4503, 2010 WL 1329701
...defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located." In cases involving multiple defendants residing in different counties, actions "may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." See § 47.021, Fla....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 3968, 2009 WL 1153510
...t when a natural person is sued along with a corporate defendant, and there is a county in which both the individual and corporate entity reside, venue is proper only in the county of joint residency.
96 So.2d at 540-41. This rule is an exception to section
47.021, Florida Statutes, which provides that a plaintiff may bring an action against multiple defendants in any county in which any defendant resides....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2006 WL 824906
...Costner,
263 So.2d 852 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972), or when there are multiple defendants with no common place of residence, see, e.g., Highland Ins. Co. v. Walker Mem'l Sanitarium & Benevolent Ass'n,
225 So.2d 572, 574 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). In response, Mr. Perez argues that section
47.021as it has been interpreted by the Florida courtsshould control the venue of Ms. Ferrell's action. "Actions against two or more defendants residing in different counties may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides." §
47.021. On its face, section
47.021 could support venue in Hillsborough County because AMEX, a foreign corporate defendant, resides in Hillsborough County for venue purposes. [1] However, the supreme *391 court has limited the application of section
47.021 when foreign corporate defendants are involved....
...ction 46.02 cannot be applied to defeat the individual defendant's venue privilege granted by Section 46.01." Enfinger v. Baxley,
96 So.2d 538, 540-41 (Fla. 1957); see ch. 67-254, § 3, Laws of Fla. (renumbering § 46.01 as §
47.011 and § 46.02 as §
47.021). Following the teaching of Enfinger, we have stated that section
47.021 "applies only when codefendants reside in `different' counties." Commercial Carrier Corp....
...Perez argues that because AMEX has an agent in his county of residence, Palm Beach County is the proper venue. Both parties correctly construe the sections of chapter 47 on which each relies. Our review of Florida's venue law does not reveal that either section
47.021 or section
47.041 should trump the other when there are multiple defendants and multiple causes of action joined in one action. We do note, however, that section
47.041 includes a provision that would allow the court to order separate trials, a provision that is not contained in section
47.021....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11397
properly laid in either Pinellas County under section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1981) (because appellant
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1989 WL 149616
...on to transfer venue from Dade to Monroe, is a federally chartered corporation with chapters in both Dade and Monroe Counties. Section
47.011, Florida Statutes (1987), states that an action is to be brought in the county where the defendant resides. Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1987), provides that where an action is brought against two or more defendants residing in different counties, the action may be brought in any county in which any defendant resides. Here, all defendants reside in Monroe County even though the Red Cross may also be said to reside in Dade County. Because the Red Cross resides in both Dade and Monroe Counties, it may not use section
47.021 to defeat defendant Mankowitz's right to be sued in Monroe County, the site of his sole residence....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1929, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9763
Dempsey, a defendant common to all of the causes. Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1985), provides that “[a]ctions
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
Additionally, in cases involving multiple defendants, section
47.021 provides that “[a]ctions against two or more
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2210, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15565
establishing that venue was improper under Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1983): Actions against defendants
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18128
were only amenable to suit in Palm Beach County, § 47.-021, Fla.Stat. (1979);2 Walt Disney World Co. v. Leff
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2547, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16693
Kohen’s argument ignores the clear dictates of Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1983), which provides: Actions
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5637
agree with appellant’s contention and reverse. Section
47.021 Fla.Stat.F.S.A. provides as follows: “Actions
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 7561, 2015 WL 2393650
...defendant resides, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in
litigation is located.” §
47.011, Fla. Stat. (2014). Where, as here, multiple
defendants are involved, venue is proper in any county in which one of the
defendants resides. See §
47.021, Fla....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19431
under any of the causes of action. Nor does Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1981), overcome the right
CopyPublished | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 704043
...County. The trial court offered Southern Heritage the option of severing count five for trial in Polk County. See Perez,
932 So.2d at 391 (citing James A. Knowles, Inc. v. Imperial Lumber Co.,
238 So.2d 487, 488 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)) (explaining that section
47.021, Florida Statutes (2005), gave defendant a venue privilege and section
47.041, Florida Statutes (2005), allowed trial court to order separate trials)....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 3486, 2011 WL 890962
...Reversed. HAZOURI and CIKLIN, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] A trial court's order granting a motion to transfer venue based on a plaintiff's erroneous venue selection is subject to de novo review. Brown v. Nagelhout,
33 So.3d 83, 84 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). [2] Now §
47.021, Fla....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13734
principal office in a different county. Fla.Stat. §
47.021 (1973); Amelia Island Mosquito Control District
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1863, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9610
county in which any of the defendants reside. §
47.021, Fla.Stat. (1985). Accordingly, because venue
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18690
the right to be sued in its resident county. Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1981), has no applicability
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1903, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15183
against Perkins as a co-defendant, pursuant to section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1983). The argument of the
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2078, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10019
Hendry County. The trial court determined that section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1973), controlled. This
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20860
resi*498dency in Duval County. We disagree. Section
47.021, Florida Statutes (1979),2 makes it quite clear
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 16452
that venue is controlled by Florida Statutes, §
47.021, which provides as follows “Actions against two
